PC 01/12/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

Gary Twisselmann, a homeowner of Oakhill #2, 7472 Palm Court, addressed the Commission stating that the homeowners asked him to get an idea of the price range of the townhouses and homes. Mr, Fairfield said the townhouses would be roughly $100,000-130,000 and the duets roughly $150,000-180,000. He indicated that they do not, however, have a definite price at this time, Mr. Twisselmann addressed the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for this case as follows: There is no walkway between the proposed homes and Foothill High School; there is a planned park access which people can walk through but it is unimproved and homeowners in Oakhill #3 suffer damaged fences repeatedly. He went to the map on the wall and reviewed their areas of concern with regard to walkways through the subdivisions. Chairperson Lindsey asked if Mr, Twisselmann's group made their requests when the planned unit development proposal came before the City previously, Mr. Twisselmann acknowledged that they had not and indicated the only reason with regard to the fences being kicked in and concerns of access to Foothill High School, Commissioner Jamieson indicated he was not sure a walkway would be the answer inasmuch as children tend to use the straightest route from one point to another, Mr, Twisselmann felt this would be minimized with the new homes in the area, Mr. Twisselmann addressed Item 7 of the Initial Study concerning the curved section on Muirwood with additional travel trips in light of the fact that cars park on both sides of the street and felt this is an accident waiting to happen, He said he is not aware of any traffic control devices planned for the Las Positas intersection. Chairperson Lindsey indicated that parking on the corner of Muirwood isn't the responsibility of the developers at this time and that the City would have to look at this as a separate matter and that a stop sign, signal, etc. would have to be considered at the time the overpass is completed. Mr, Warnick responded that when the traffic increases with the overcrossing another study would be made. Mr, Twisselmann then addressed Item 13, Aesthetics, and that if one looks at the Stoneridge Townhouse Development that development has provided a recreational vehicle storage yard, etc. and he does not see one on this pain. He was concerned with recreational vehicles parked on Muirwood Drive. Chairperson Lindsey indicated it was probably considered at the original application stage, Commissioner Doherty added that there is an ordinance that no vehicle can be parked on a public street in the City over 72 hours and that if a person called the police they would warn and cite violators and that you can't make changes to a planned unit development already approved. -11-